<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Pick your POV carefully</title>
	<atom:link href="http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3429/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3429</link>
	<description>The stomping grounds of Tim Carmody, Robin Sloan and Matt Thompson. It&#039;s a long-running conversation about media, journalism, technology, cities, culture, design, books, music, movies, the future and the past.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 01:58:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: This week in media musings: Shirky speaks, and three new projects to watch &#124; Mark Coddington</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3429/comment-page-1#comment-6299</link>
		<dc:creator>This week in media musings: Shirky speaks, and three new projects to watch &#124; Mark Coddington</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 16:31:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=3429#comment-6299</guid>
		<description>[...] Shirky&#8217;s &#8220;Thinking the Unthinkable,&#8221; but I think the fact that Howard Weaver and Robin Sloan were so easily able to poke holes in it probably shoots that assessment [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[…] Shirky’s “Thinking the Unthinkable,” but I think the fact that Howard Weaver and Robin Sloan were so easily able to poke holes in it probably shoots that assessment […]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Books That Would Make Great E-Books &#171; Snarkmarket</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3429/comment-page-1#comment-6247</link>
		<dc:creator>The Books That Would Make Great E-Books &#171; Snarkmarket</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 01:43:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=3429#comment-6247</guid>
		<description>[...] Some overlap with what Snarkmarket&#8217;s said about the future of e-book readers, among, other places, here and here. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[…] Some overlap with what Snarkmarket’s said about the future of e-book readers, among, other places, here and here. […]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3429/comment-page-1#comment-6211</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 21:52:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=3429#comment-6211</guid>
		<description>I have &lt;a href=&quot;http://cloudculturecontent.blogspot.com/2009/07/turning-fame-into-fortune.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;written&lt;/a&gt; about the creators&#039; perspective in a few &lt;a href=&quot;http://cloudculturecontent.blogspot.com/2009/08/opening-gates.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;places&lt;/a&gt;.  Here&#039;s my take:

From the perspective of creators who want to make a living off of their craft, almost nothing, from a practical perspective, is going to change.  A tiny fraction of musicians make the vast majority of the money in the music industry; this was true from the beginning of recorded music and will remain true tomorrow.  A larger group will be able to make a decent living, a much larger group will be able to make a mediocre living, and the vast majority will not be able to make any living at all just by creating.

From the perspective of people who just love to create and have no expectation of making a living off of it, however, things are already a lot better than they used to be.  They can put the fruit of their labor up in a public place and even if only a dozen people ever see it, odds are it&#039;s 12 more than would have seen it in the pre-internet age.  And public exposure means more people have the &lt;i&gt;chance&lt;/i&gt; to suddenly become popular enough to make a living off of creating than did in the past, since it used to be you had to put in a great deal of energy just to get published or get a gig or some equivalent.

I agree with you that the creator&#039;s perspective does get largely ignored.  But I don&#039;t think the Kindle Store or iTunes really does anyone any favors; it&#039;s still only going to be a tiny minority of people that will make money on their creations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have <a href="http://cloudculturecontent.blogspot.com/2009/07/turning-fame-into-fortune.html" rel="nofollow">written</a> about the creators’ perspective in a few <a href="http://cloudculturecontent.blogspot.com/2009/08/opening-gates.html" rel="nofollow">places</a>.  Here’s my take:</p>
<p>From the perspective of creators who want to make a living off of their craft, almost nothing, from a practical perspective, is going to change.  A tiny fraction of musicians make the vast majority of the money in the music industry; this was true from the beginning of recorded music and will remain true tomorrow.  A larger group will be able to make a decent living, a much larger group will be able to make a mediocre living, and the vast majority will not be able to make any living at all just by creating.</p>
<p>From the perspective of people who just love to create and have no expectation of making a living off of it, however, things are already a lot better than they used to be.  They can put the fruit of their labor up in a public place and even if only a dozen people ever see it, odds are it’s 12 more than would have seen it in the pre-internet age.  And public exposure means more people have the <i>chance</i> to suddenly become popular enough to make a living off of creating than did in the past, since it used to be you had to put in a great deal of energy just to get published or get a gig or some equivalent.</p>
<p>I agree with you that the creator’s perspective does get largely ignored.  But I don’t think the Kindle Store or iTunes really does anyone any favors; it’s still only going to be a tiny minority of people that will make money on their creations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Food For Thought Links &#171; Tape Noise Diary</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3429/comment-page-1#comment-6210</link>
		<dc:creator>Food For Thought Links &#171; Tape Noise Diary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 19:51:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=3429#comment-6210</guid>
		<description>[...] via Snarkmarket [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[…] via Snarkmarket […]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Katherine Warman Kern</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3429/comment-page-1#comment-6209</link>
		<dc:creator>Katherine Warman Kern</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 19:18:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=3429#comment-6209</guid>
		<description>I agree that Paul Graham&#039;s analysis is just to rationalize I-Tunes (with paid songs) success competing against Peer 2 Peer (free) in the context of the &quot;Noone pays for Content&quot; argument.  

Someone is analyzing why I-Tunes succeeded and is probably learning what they could improve to charge even more.  And they are considering the implications for news.  I suspect  at least one of these shrewd marketers is Murdoch.  Perhaps that&#039;s assuming a competitor is smarter than he is.  But I&#039;d rather do that than assume his ultimate solution is to collude with competitors to put up a paywall.  

Katherine Warman Kern
@comradity</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that Paul Graham’s analysis is just to rationalize I-Tunes (with paid songs) success competing against Peer 2 Peer (free) in the context of the “Noone pays for Content” argument.  </p>
<p>Someone is analyzing why I-Tunes succeeded and is probably learning what they could improve to charge even more.  And they are considering the implications for news.  I suspect  at least one of these shrewd marketers is Murdoch.  Perhaps that’s assuming a competitor is smarter than he is.  But I’d rather do that than assume his ultimate solution is to collude with competitors to put up a paywall.  </p>
<p>Katherine Warman Kern<br />
@comradity</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3429/comment-page-1#comment-6207</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:29:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=3429#comment-6207</guid>
		<description>People search through the iTunes stores 30 second clips for fun. If you want to quickly listen to a wide range of music, iTunes is probably the best way to do it; Youtube just doesn&#039;t have the depth to compete. Then, add the fact that you can quickly download an album without monkeying around on rapidshare and it ends up right on your iPod.

Is this a tax? It looks like it is just a better product ( Amazon is often cheaper, but people still like iTunes).

So much of the economic analysis of digital sales seems to overlook the simple and traditional answers. What ever happened to Occam&#039;s Razor?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People search through the iTunes stores 30 second clips for fun. If you want to quickly listen to a wide range of music, iTunes is probably the best way to do it; Youtube just doesn’t have the depth to compete. Then, add the fact that you can quickly download an album without monkeying around on rapidshare and it ends up right on your iPod.</p>
<p>Is this a tax? It looks like it is just a better product ( Amazon is often cheaper, but people still like iTunes).</p>
<p>So much of the economic analysis of digital sales seems to overlook the simple and traditional answers. What ever happened to Occam’s Razor?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Nash</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3429/comment-page-1#comment-6205</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard Nash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:30:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=3429#comment-6205</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s true that Paul Graham&#039;s observations aren&#039;t especially original, so much so that even some publishers, like Andrew Savikas at O&#039;Reilly, have already been making them for a while. And the piece smacks a little bit of a &quot;The less I know about an industry from the inside, the easier it is for me to see their problems&quot; type of logic. (That is, he doesn&#039;t know the business, and some personal anecdotes as a content user/consumer don&#039;t make him an expert.) The real value of the piece is that he&#039;s getting people talking about it, because of who he is. I offer two thoughts, two ways forward, both from publishing people who are at least superficially trying to preserve something though it could just as easily be said, we&#039;re listening and learning. One, from the aforementioned Savikas, is content as service, http://toc.oreilly.com/2009/07/content-is-a-service-business.html and the other from me, on content as community: http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6673022.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It’s true that Paul Graham’s observations aren’t especially original, so much so that even some publishers, like Andrew Savikas at O’Reilly, have already been making them for a while. And the piece smacks a little bit of a “The less I know about an industry from the inside, the easier it is for me to see their problems” type of logic. (That is, he doesn’t know the business, and some personal anecdotes as a content user/consumer don’t make him an expert.) The real value of the piece is that he’s getting people talking about it, because of who he is. I offer two thoughts, two ways forward, both from publishing people who are at least superficially trying to preserve something though it could just as easily be said, we’re listening and learning. One, from the aforementioned Savikas, is content as service, <a href="http://toc.oreilly.com/2009/07/content-is-a-service-business.html" rel="nofollow">http://toc.oreilly.com/2009/07/content-is-a-service-business.html</a> and the other from me, on content as community: <a href="http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6673022.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6673022.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Howard Weaver</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3429/comment-page-1#comment-6203</link>
		<dc:creator>Howard Weaver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 02:41:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=3429#comment-6203</guid>
		<description>And tolls work; always have. For one thing, they&#039;re fair (unless collected at the point of a gun) and relate specifically to what the traveler wants: to move from A to C.

I had a few other nits to pick with Graham, too. You can see them at http://editor.blogspot.com/2009/09/seminal-work-or-sloppy-thinking.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And tolls work; always have. For one thing, they’re fair (unless collected at the point of a gun) and relate specifically to what the traveler wants: to move from A to C.</p>
<p>I had a few other nits to pick with Graham, too. You can see them at <a href="http://editor.blogspot.com/2009/09/seminal-work-or-sloppy-thinking.html" rel="nofollow">http://editor.blogspot.com/2009/09/seminal-work-or-sloppy-thinking.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Carmody</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3429/comment-page-1#comment-6202</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Carmody</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 02:35:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=3429#comment-6202</guid>
		<description>I wrote a post on Short Schrift last summer titled &lt;a href=&quot;http://short-schrift.blogspot.com/2008/07/that-app-is-book.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&quot;That App Is A Book&quot;&lt;/a&gt; that proposed something like a content experience application. So yeah - I&#039;m totally down with that. 

As for your observation that &quot;people are happy to pay for things if it’s easy enough&quot; - cf. &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3142&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;It Feels A Little Like Free&lt;/a&gt;&quot; - likewise, right there. Tolls are a total pain. Can you imagine if a toll - a real toll, like getting on a bus, or crossing a highway - were as easy as buying a CD from iTunes? 

So let me spin Graham on this one. Graham says, dismissively: &quot;iTunes is more of a tollbooth than a store.&quot; Sloan/Carmody say, affirmatively: &quot;iTunes is the future of tolls!&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wrote a post on Short Schrift last summer titled <a href="http://short-schrift.blogspot.com/2008/07/that-app-is-book.html" rel="nofollow">“That App Is A Book”</a> that proposed something like a content experience application. So yeah — I’m totally down with that. </p>
<p>As for your observation that “people are happy to pay for things if it’s easy enough” — cf. “<a href="http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3142" rel="nofollow">It Feels A Little Like Free</a>” — likewise, right there. Tolls are a total pain. Can you imagine if a toll — a real toll, like getting on a bus, or crossing a highway — were as easy as buying a CD from iTunes? </p>
<p>So let me spin Graham on this one. Graham says, dismissively: “iTunes is more of a tollbooth than a store.” Sloan/Carmody say, affirmatively: “iTunes is the future of tolls!”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robin Sloan</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2009/3429/comment-page-1#comment-6201</link>
		<dc:creator>Robin Sloan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 02:08:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=3429#comment-6201</guid>
		<description>This is one of those posts I sort of had the impulse to write and then just typed straight through, so it doesn&#039;t exactly have laser-focus. Still interested to hear what you think, though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is one of those posts I sort of had the impulse to write and then just typed straight through, so it doesn’t exactly have laser-focus. Still interested to hear what you think, though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

